ReviewJournal of neuro-oncology2025
CAR-engineered NK cells versus CAR T cells in treatment of glioblastoma; strength and flaws.
Review in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- In Vivo CAR-Based Immune Cell Engineering: Future Applications and Challenges in Malignant Glioma.Cancers · 2026Review
- Cell therapy for brain tumors: The first 60 years.Cell reports. Medicine · 2026Review
- Update of NK cell therapy in pediatric brain tumors.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Review
- Immunotherapy and targeted therapy for high grade gliomas: current and future directions.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2025Review
- Glioblastoma: From Pathophysiology to Novel Therapeutic Approaches.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Review
- Medulloblastoma: biology and immunotherapy.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- From innate-like to innate: the next wave of off-the-shelf CAR immunotherapies.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- The broad spectrum of cancer and immunotherapy: achievements and limitations.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Nanomedicine for Glioblastoma Therapy: Novel Insights and Future Perspectives.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Glioblastoma (GBM) is a highly aggressive primary brain tumor that carries a grim prognosis. Because of the dearth of treatment options available for treatment of GBM, Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR)-engineered T cell and Natural Killer (NK) therapy could provide alternative strategies to address the challenges in GBM treatment. In these approaches, CAR T and NK cells are engineered for cancer-specific immunotherapy by recognizing surface antigens independently of major histocompatibility complex (MHC) molecules. However, the efficacy of CAR T cells is hindered by GBM's downregulation of its targeted antigens. CAR NK cells face similar challenges, but, in contrast, they offer advantages as off-the-shelf allogeneic products, devoid of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) risk as well as anti-cancer activity beyond CAR specificity, potentially reducing the risk of relapse or resistance. Despite CAR T cell therapies being extensively studied in clinical settings, the use of CAR-modified NK cells in GBM treatment remains largely in the preclinical stage. This review aims to discuss recent advancements in NK cell and CAR T cell therapies for GBM, including methods for introducing CARs into both NK cells and T cells, addressing manufacturing challenges, and providing evidence supporting the efficacy of these approaches from preclinical and early-phase clinical studies. The comprehensive evaluation of CAR-engineered NK cells and CAR T cells seeks to identify the optimal therapeutic approach for GBM, contributing to the development of effective immunotherapies for this devastating disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39538038What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.